Analysis: Was It a Smart Move of YouTube To Make Labels Partners in Crime?

Authored by Jay Baage on October 19, 2006 - 7:19am.

The timely music license deals that YouTube announced with music labels Universal, Sony BMG just days before selling off to Google — was actually a calculated part of the deal, reports The New York Times Thursday. Universal and Sony BMG was paid in equity that, when the Google acqusition went through, became worth $50 million.

 

“That maneuvering does seem a little shady, but all three of the involved parties — YouTube, Google, and the labels — benefited, so none of them are going to complain. If those payouts are enough to keep the labels off thelawsuit-trigger, that would be a pretty slick move. Too bad there weren’t similar deals worked out alongside TV and movie licensing”, says Liz Gannes of the techblog GigaOM.

 

I agree. YouTube must find a way to get the “old media” companies to share in their profits directly as well as indirectly through promotion. By making them shareholders, YouTube gets in bed with they companies that used to be considered to represent their biggest legal threat.

 

However, I wonder what the competitors to Sony BMG, Universal and Warner Music (that struck a deal with YouTube a little earlier) as well as the TV and movie companies think about not being in on this deal? Many copyright holders, including the Hollywood and television studios, could still pursue legal action if their content appears on YouTube. However, it should be obvious from the Napster case that rear-guard actions like lawsuits don’t turn back time and it only alienates your core audience, especially if they are millions and millions of YouTube users. We have already seen News Corp back off on this issue.

 

There are, however, another legal aspect of this deal that, if true, is indeed a little “shady”. Mitch Ratcliffe of ZD Net:

 

”We have to ask if the announcement by Google that it had acquired YouTube was held off to give YouTube time to close the music label deals, which included equity stakes in YouTube. In practice, it is little different than the back-dating of options controversy currently jangling the value of many Silicon Valley stocks. Looks like Web 2.0 just got its first corporate scandal. Indeed, Web 2.0 has grown up.”       

 Joakim Baage




Comments

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
Add image
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd><br><p> <b> <i> <img> <hr>
  • Images can be added to this post.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Image CAPTCHA
Copy the characters (respecting upper/lower case) from the image.